In lots of concrete cases, yes. Assisted suicide. Abortion (I'm speaking morally. not legally.) Balancing free speech with the need to protect against kiddie porn. The law reviews are full of this stuff. However, I'm talking about the stuff that fills the practice of the courts: murder,rape, robbery, fraud, police abuse, discrimination, etc., or the ordinary business of international politics, killing, lying. Your parents and kindergarten teacher taught you better: share your stuff, don't hit other people, be polite, tell the truth, be respectful.
jks
>
>I think there are at least a few, perhaps clustering around bioethics and
>the like. Sometimes it seems that practical ethical considerations of civil
>disobedience and other political acts form another cluster.
>
>In other words, while I would tend to agree that for most people (those who
>aren't moral idiots, say) the moral life is more a matter of will than
>knowledge, I can't say that we "all know what is the right thing to do" in
>*every* circumstance. (This is one reason why I'm a reluctant Kantian at
>best and, typically, vacillate between something like Singer's
>Utilitarianism and Thomas Hill's reading of Kantianism.)
>
>So, Justin, how far will your "we know what is the right thing to do" go?
>
>Best,
>Kendall Clark
>
>PS--Posted warily since the last time I talked about practical ethics on
>this list Carrol Cox tried to crucify me. If I'd known I'd see him ask
>months later "What is the Veil of Ignorance" I would have taken the
>threatening approach of nails and hammer much less seriously. :>
_________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp